https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24174 The Tribunal treated its earlier omission to notice the respondent's filed and referred earlier orders for the relevant years as a mistake apparent on the face of the record and allowed rectification under the Wealth-tax Act framework. The High Court found no perversity in that approach, noting that the issue had already been decided on merits by the Tribunal. It therefore declined to interfere under Article 226 and sustained the rectification order. en-us Thu, 14 Jan 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:02:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24174 The Tribunal treated its earlier omission to notice the respondent's filed and referred earlier orders for the relevant years as a mistake apparent on the face of the record and allowed rectification under the Wealth-tax Act framework. The High Court found no perversity in that approach, noting that the issue had already been decided on merits by the Tribunal. It therefore declined to interfere under Article 226 and sustained the rectification order. Case-Laws Wealth-tax Thu, 14 Jan 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=24174